Bat Vader said:
I feel like them naming it Skynet was meant to be a joke and I feel like people are taking the name more seriously than it needs to be.
There's no way they named it Skynet by accident. That's what makes it funny.
It's an algorithm designed to help *automate* the process of assassinating other human beings via flying death-robots and/or killsquads on the ground. It doesn't actually look for hard evidence if someone is actually a terrorist, merely that they kindasorta meet some broad criteria. Then they gave it an obviously jokey name on top of it all. Of course it was a joke, it was just in horrendously bad taste.
Nimcha said:
Is there any proof whatsoever anyone actually got killed just because they were flagged with this system, which they're obviously testing? Of course not, but why not make a news article anyway. Nobody cares.
The issue is that they were trying to automate the signature strike program. Something which already seems to be an abject failure.
Basically the US drone program has two kinds of assassination methods. There are "Personality Strikes" where they know specifically who they are killing. This guy is a known Al Qaeda lieutenant. He's a known terrorist. We know he has done this and now we are going to kill him. I think that is generally okay, and I think most people will agree.
They also do what is known as "Signature Strikes" though. In a signature strike, we actually have no idea who we're killing, we just think that they were doing something kind of suspicious. Maybe it was a group of people with guns out on the border of Pakistan/Afghanistan. Maybe it was someone digging around in the dirt for some reason or another. So we lob a hellfire missile at them just to be sure. Unilaterally. Without actually knowing who they are. The issue is that, a lot of people in afghanistan and pakistan own guns. At a lot of weddings out there, they bring their guns and fire them into the air. So sometimes we lob an anti-tank missile into the middle of a wedding. Sometimes that afghan digging around in the dirt isn't planting an IED, or hiding something. Sometimes it's an old lady who is digging up her garden. We have no way to know, since we just splattered them into a billion pieces.
It's also common practice to do what is known as a "double-tap" with our drones. Basically, you lob a missile at your target, then you wait for a little bit. You wait until people come in to try and help the wounded, or recover the bodies, and then you launch a second missile at those people to kill them too. If you're doing this inside of a known terrorist compound, that's one thing, but this happens inside of towns and cities too, and a lot of the time all we're just killing first-responders and/or decent human beings. Double-taps are meant to send a message. Don't go and help those people bleeding out and screaming in pain from their burns and shrapnel wounds. You let them lay there and die, or you're going to get killed too.
Fun-fact, the double-tap is actually a common method employed by Al Qaeda suicide-bombers as well. For similar reasons.
Trying to get hard numbers on civilian deaths is tough though. The Obama administration classifies all "military-aged males within a combat zone" as potential enemy-combatants. Some of the estimates I've seen though... they don't look good for us. And who do you think these people blame for their family and friends getting splattered by a supersonic missile from the heavens? Do they blame Al Qaeda? Nope, they blame the people who pulled the trigger. They did a study, and it turns out that most Afghans have never even heard of 9/11. They don't know why we're there. All they know is that sometimes we kill people they care about. How do you think the pakistanis we kill feel about it? We aren't even at war with them.